Alternative strategies for conflict resolution in multi-context systems

Multi-Context Systems are logical formalizations of distributed context theories connected through mapping rules, which enable information flow between different contexts. Reasoning in Multi-Context Systems introduces many challenges that arise from the heterogeneity of contexts with regard to the language and inference system that they use, and from the potential conflicts that may arise from the interaction of context theories through the mappings. The current paper proposes four alternative strategies for using context and preference information to resolve conflicts in a Multi-Context Framework, in which contexts are modeled as rule theories, mappings as defeasible rules, and global inconsistency is handled using methods of distributed defeasible reasoning.